Re: Proposed patch: make SQL interval-literal syntax work per spec
От | Ron Mayer |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Proposed patch: make SQL interval-literal syntax work per spec |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 48CAD72E.90406@cheapcomplexdevices.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Proposed patch: make SQL interval-literal syntax work per spec (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Proposed patch: make SQL interval-literal syntax work
per spec
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > The reason it's not SQL-standard is the data value isn't. > So not a problem. Someone conforming to the spec limits on > what he puts in will see spec-compliant output. I think all > you need is 'yyy-mm dd hh:mm:ss' where you omit yyy-mm if > zeroes, omit dd if zero, omit hh:mm:ss if zeroes (but maybe > only if dd is also 0? otherwise your output is just dd which > is uncomfortably ambiguous). Great. That's what I'll do. Any convention or preference on the naming of the GUC? I assume "intervalstyle" is reasonable? Or thoughts regarding the current EncodeInterval() that's already using the "datestyle" GUC? pg82=# select interval '1'; interval ---------- 00:00:01 (1 row) pg82=# set datestyle='sql'; SET pg82=# select interval '1'; interval ---------- @ 1 sec (1 row)
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: